Counting the Chips Let the reader beware: this is no editorial; this is an inven tor)', an inspection of the balance sheets, a closing up of the books, and a look over our shoulder at the past year. This is a sort of process the incumbent editor goes through. Besides dusting off the cluttered desk, removing obsolete notices from the bulletin board, and cleaning beer bottle caps out of the filing cabinet, we find it necessary to take stock of the things we are leaving behind for our capable successor. These include: a box of aspirins, a dictionary, assorted minutes of meetings and faculty bulletins, a few clean sheets of copy paper, a lot of unfinished work, and some regrets. We regret most of all the unfinished work. There is the strong feeling that, if only we could do it all over again, every thing would turn out much better. There is the inescapable rankling restiveness which comes from knowing that, when considered in terms of positive results, our work has failed. (Here, of course, is the place where all the many enemies we have made this year can gloatingly lick the feathers from their chops . . . and we hope it makes them happy.) On the other hand, there is also the slim hope that perhaps the actual results, the final scores, are not all on the record yet. And to this possibility we pin the last few shreds of our once blithe optimism. We hope that as time goes on, and the University matures, and students become more tolerant, open minded and liberal, that the truth of some of the things we have said in the editorials of the past year will be revealed. Just as on a cloudy night it is hard to believe that a full moon is shining, but when the clouds move on, we realize that, of course, the moon was there all the time. (And this is the place where our few friends, the loyal workers on the staff and the silent observers on the campus, can nod their heads and under stand.) We have tried throughout the year to live up to the prom ises made in our first editorial. Promises about truth, impar tiality, and true representation of the students. We have not been impartial; instead we have in almost all cases taken a def inite and uncompromising stand on controversial questions. But we have tried to be fair. We have not been representative of all the students. Too often the students have been too apathetic to become well informed, and our ideas often have turned out to be contrary to the ideas of most of the student body. But we have tried to be well-informed, and urged our readers to do likewise. We believe we can sincerely say that we have at all times written the truth as best we recognized the facts as such. And for this we have been criticized most of all. And from this we have learned that only a few individuals are unpragmatic enough to accept the truth, regardless of their liking for it. ^ Contrary to public opinion, we realize only too painfully, our shortcomings: we know that we have not been diplomatic or tactful, that we have not reflected the Oregon spirit of con servatism, that we have refused to bury our heads in the sand pile just because the other ostriches did, we have not deferred to our superiors, or their advice, we have lacked the light touch ; we have fought a losing battle, and we have disappointed many students. The last refers particularly to those who eagerly followed our campaign against Theta Nu Epsilon. These students wanted blood; they expected us to publish a list of TNE mem bers and hoped that the TNEs would be tarred, feathered, and exiled in disgrace. Here’s our answer. We have a list. We have no proof but circumstantial evidence. We can’t take chances with libel suits. Furthermore, what lasting good would come of the expose of a few men? That has not been the crux of the problem at all. The contemptible thing about TNE is not really the members, it is rather the basic ideology of fascism behind it. Fascism or naziism or communism or Ku Klux Klanism cannot be killed by sljpoting the exponents of those philosophies. The ideas can only be made ineffectual, gradually, by educating the public to reject those ideas. We have tried all year to show that un democratic student government and coercion and control bv a minority group are bad. If we have failed to convince the stu tends of that basic fact, then it would be ridiculous to publish any rosier oi names. To those who believe that our criticism of the University and the students this year has indicated some kind of antipathy to Oregon, we 'have this to say: To love a thing as it is, is a bitter mockery of that thing, since nothing is perfect and love requires perfection. We can truly love only the potential good or perfection of a thing, George Santayana said—and we agree. Therefore, our criticism of the University’s imperfections are no indication of our affection for Oregon, or our aversion to Ore gon. A true admirer of the University must love it as it would wish to be. And the first act of sympathy must be to move with the University toward its betterment. We have tried in our criticism to move toward the better ment of tlie University and the students. Whether our efforts have been in vain is for the future to reveal. What more can we say? Goodbye, Oregon. God bless you! Oregon H Emerald MARGUERITE WITTWER-WRIGriT, Editor GEORGE PEGG, Business Manager BOB FRAZIER Associate to Editor JEANNE SIMMONDS BILL YATES Managing Editor News Editor BERNIE HAMMERBECK Sports Editor DON FAIR, WALLY HUNTER Assistant Sports Editors*. walt McKinney Assistant Managing Editor BOBOLEE BROPHY and JI'NE GOETZE Assistant News Editors BARBARA TWIFORD Advertising Manager PHYLLIS KOHLMEIER Executive Secretary uon jones, a-tan rnotograpner REPORTERS Beth Basler, Bettye Joe Bledsoe, Diana Dye, Ruth Eades, A1 English, Luwayne Engwall, Virginia Fletcher, Joanne Frydenlund, Chuck de Ganahl, Laverne Gunderson, Dale Harlan, Donna Kletzing, Janice Kent, Pat King, Phyllis Kohlmeier, Betty Lagomarsino, June McConneH, Barbara Murphy, Laura Olson, Carol Jo Parker, Nancy Peterson, Helen Sher lan, Virginia Thompson, Jim Wallace, Sally Waller. MEMBER — ASSOCIATED COLLEGIATE PRESS ,ASSOCIATED PRESS WIRE SERVICE Signed editorial features and columns in this issue of the Emerald reflect nothing. [Nowhere in the paper will be found any tiling resembling the opinions of the editorial staff, the student body, or the University. Any libelous material contained is unintentional. Entered as second class matter at the oostoffice, Eugene, Oregon. For Us the Living Tomorrow across the nation Americans pause for a while from regular tasks to commemorate those who served and died in the service of the country. Appropriate ceremonies, prayer, and silent thought will acknowledge America’s fallen heroes. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this. Here and there a tear will fall among the fresh-cut flowers on soldiers’ graves; a tear swelled from a heart cut by a war forged sword, and dedicated to valor in battle. We cannot dedicate—we cannot consecrate—we hannot hallow . . . \\ hile we remember them, this Memorial day, let us ask ourselves, are we giving a measure of the devotion in peace that they gave in war? Can we truthfully say everything is all right? Can we truthfully say we will carry on the fight we asked them to die for? It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the great unfinished work which they have thus far no nobly advanced. Their fight was not a beginning, nor was it an ending. Their fight was to bridge the interim and give us time to gather our forces for a new onslaught against those who would abridge freedom. For this they were paradoxically expendable and in dispensable. Their part in preserving “our rvay of life” has ended in an unqualified victory. Their mission has been suc cessfully accomplished regardless of the outcome of ours. To them, to the future, to our self-respect, however, we owe a greater debt than dedication. It is necessary that . . . . . . from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion. . . . The cause for which they fought has not been lost. It is real and alive and personal today, as it was at Gettysburg, Santiago, the Marne, and Guadalcanal. And as long as we can pause for even a moment on Memorial day and remember . . . . . . These dead shall not have died in vain. . . . Hope is not dead. It has been sustained by those we honor now, and it is and will be sustained by men like them who still live. Men who will guarantee that . . . . . . Government of the people, by the people, and for the people shall not perish from the earth. —T. G. W. Telling the Editor ABOUT WILLIE EARLE Willie Earl is dead, and the stench arising from the acquittal of his murderers is already fading from the consciousness of the American public. The sordid story of the lynching of an American by his fellow Amer icans has become familiar. No Ger man Dachau, or Japanese death march was ever more brutal and cold-blooded. But the incident, it seems, is closed in the minds of the American public. I, for one, cannot so easily nor swiftly dispel the repulsive reality of the bloody lynch-mob from my mind. I am infuriated by the gloat ing statement of its ring-leader, who said upon his acquittal, “Jus tice has been done—both ways”; and of his fellow murderer, who purposes to “go on a 14-day drunk, and then run for the office of sher iff.” The utter disregard of reason and justice by a clearly prejudiced jury in releasing the confessed slayers is, I to my mind, unthinkable. The guilt I of the lynchers, regardless of the nature of the victim's alleged crime, was beyond question. A confessed killer is guilty in any impartial court of law. The infection of the lynch mob is as dangerous to the structure of American liberty as gangrene to the human body. It must be purged from the American scene, and it must be stamped out NOW! We cannot wait for the “good people of the South” or the “intelli gent people of the South” to eradi cate this evil from their midst. The tolerant and fair-minded southern ers have displayed all of the poten cy and unit of action typical of the fabled “good people of Germany” prior to World War II. It is time the bigoted upholders nized for what they are. Lynching should be placed, by act of Congress, in the same category with kidnap ping as dealt with under the Lind bergh law. A special court should be set up by the Federal govern ment, if need be, to try such cases impartially and insure justice. It si time the bigoted upholders of intolerance and injustice be rec ognized for what they are. Anti lynch laws have always been fili bustered to death in the past. Un-^ less fair-minded people have tired - of government by all of the people, they will launch a concerted cam paign to erase the filibuster and the lynch-mobs at one blow. Willie Earl should be made a test case. Execution without a fair trial is murder whether it occur in the South, in the North, in Germany, or anywhere else in the world. If we deny civil rights to one group, how can we defend the rights of any other group ? The University has a “One World Club.” Oregon is represented in Congress by Senator Wayne Morse, who has demonstrated his willing ness to buck opposition in high places for a cause he feels is right. I would be very willing to active ly support a movement among the University students and faculty, fostered by the One-World Club, to affect these reforms. Hans Wold ABOUT “OUR FUTURE” I wish to commend the person who wrote the editorial in the Em erald on “What Is Our Future?”. I think this one editorial is worth the price of subscription for the entire year. The paragraph which contains this sentence, “Unless you realize that you are part of a civilization, which DURING YOUR OWN TIME must either change or die, . . is the theme I have been harping upon during my whole year of General Geology and is the one thing I think most important for our students to learn, that they are living in a changing world. Our old world has survived many crises, and I am sure it will pull through this one; but the kind of world we have in the future will depend upon the thinking pret ty largely of those who are now in college. Thanking you again for this time- ft ly editorial. Warren D. Smith Head, Geology and Geography Dept. ABOUT REBATES It is fair vets should not receive rebates on books not purchased with their own funds. Neither should students as a whole receive rebates based upon these purchases. Nor should the Co-op., profit. Who, then, should receive the money. With $250 billion on the cuff and plenty of dependents, it seems un cle is our poor relation right now. Uncle has made the purchases. Why doesn’t he get the rebate? Glenn Hammaker ABOUT RADIO Today I have read with interest both the front page story and the editorial in the Emerald dealing with problems confronting the Uni versity’s Speech Department in producing and presenting radio programs over the state station, KOAC. Undoubtedly this situation is traceable in part to the fact that al though the campus studios are os tensibly University property, the equipment actually used in rehears ing and releasing radio programs is controlled by KOAC, and may only be used for these purposes when specifically authorized by that Station. May I suggest that at least a par tial solution to this problem might be obtained if the University would work out a cooperative use of the facilities of station KRVM with the Eugene School Board. Station KRVM, licensed to the Eugene school district, will open its program service next Septem ber, and will operate with 475 watts of power on a frequency of 90.1 megacycles, using the new FM method of transmission. Although authorized by the FCC to operate unlimited hours, only about five hours of daily operation are planned unless additional pro gramming aid and additional talent obtained. It would be very simple and quite ■ - ■ (-P-k-ase Inruto page three)- - •